I get annoyed by the term "system of systems". To me it reeks of [[Systems Thinking]] people trying to outclass each other. My argument is that the term [[What is a System|system]] is not definable in a way that sets clear boundaries for drawing a line beyond which a "system" becomes a "system of systems". All systems are made up of components. All components are made up of subcomponents. What makes a "system" and what makes a "component" is simply an [[Arbitrary Distinction]] between frames of reference. I asked ChatGPT for an argument in favor of the existence of the term - it provided the following justifications, which I suppose are valid. ## ChatGPT's Argument in Favor of the Term Despite the vagueness, people use **“system of systems”** as a way to **signal a specific class of problems** or **design characteristics**, especially in engineering and large-scale planning. It usually implies: |Feature|Implication| |---|---| |**Operational Independence**|Each system can operate on its own| |**Managerial Independence**|Different orgs/departments own each part| |**Evolutionary Development**|Parts can be upgraded independently| |**Emergent Behavior**|New capabilities arise only when systems work together| |**Distributed Control**|No single point of control or governance| **** # More ## Source - Myself arguing with ChatGPT